Could this draft be a repeat of the 1984 draft of Jordan

[footey]

First of all... I think even knowing what we know now... I think taking Hakeem 1st in that draft was probably the best move.  If i'm running a team and I have an option between arguably the most skilled center of all time and Michael Jordan, I probably taken my chances with Hakeem.  You might suggest this is nuts...  Jordan was a god.  The best player ever.  But a lot of his success had to do with situations and circumstances.  We simply don't know if he would win 6 titles without also having a Scottie Pippen (criminally underrated player).  It's fair to note that during JOrdan's first three seasons (despite his ridiculous stats), the Bulls failed to even play .500 basketball.  They posted losing records all three years.  They DID manage to barely  make the playoffs, in part due to the eastern conference only having 11 teams.  They were out in the 1st round in all three years.  It wasn't until Pippen's rookie season that they won 50+ games and had an extended playoff run...   Hakeem, on the other hand... you could stick him on any team and instantly be a contender.  I know the saying is, "You need a dominant big man to win a title... unless you are Michael Jordan" and I'd agree with that.  But even knowing that...  I think you have to go with Hakeem in that draft.  Rockets went from 29 wins (pre Akeem) to 48 wins his rookie season.  Made the finals his second season.  7 feet 255... arguably the best low post moves ever... averaged 21 points, 12 rebounds, 2.7 blocks, 1.2 steals on 54% shooting as a rookie.  Forget it... I'm 100% taking Hakeem in a do-over.  It's a no-brainer.  But I don't blame any of you if you'd rather take your chances that things work out the same way with Jordan (also fair to note that the Rockets probably COULD have gotten away with taking JOrdan there... they already had Ralph Sampson and he was a beast in his own right... but in general I'm operating under the idea that regardless of situation/team... in a blind pick, my best move is taking Hakeem over JOrdan).

With that said... The Sam Bowie thing is another story entirely.

Bill Simmons disproves this myth in his "Book of Basketball". In short, there wasn't ever much doubt that Jordan was going to be a star. Pre-draft they labelled him (as well as a few other players like Barkley and Hakeem) "bona fide superstars".  Here are some of the points Simmons makes:

While Jordan's potential was unclear while playing for Dean Smith, everyone knew he was good.  But during the 84 Olympic tryouts, Jordan supposedly DOMINATED.  The two best players of those tryouts were apparently Jordan and Barkley.  US coach Bobby Knight was so thoroughly impressed by Jordan that he called Portland's GM (a friend of Knight) and "implored" him to draft Jordan.  Supposedly when the GM said, "we need a center', Knight responded, "well play him at center then". 

Jordan also was thought to be one of the most exciting college players of the decade.  When the Bulls actually selected him, the announcers refer to him as a "can't miss prospect" and instantly compare him to Dr. J.  In contrast, when Portland takes Bowie they are quick to bring up the fact that he had come back from a stress fracture injury to the left shinbone and was out for two seasons and redshirted.  It even seemed moronic at the time.  Six years earlier they had lost Walton to repeated stress fractures... and here they were passing up a "can't miss" prospect in order to take an injury prone big man coming off a stress fracture injury... who averaged a mere 10 points and 9 rebounds in college.  Also they mentioned the fact that "he passed up the olympics". 

After the Blazers picked Bowie the announcers had the following exchange:

AL:  "You know, there was a question a little earlier perhaps, Portland toying with the idea of the great, can't-miss talent of Michael Jordan against Sam Bowie, who, uh, who of course, coming off the injury, he says he is sound.  Portland has checked him out through a seven-hour test, but the question is Bowie going now over the course of an 82-game schedule"

Lou (nodding):  It is a calculated risk.

So in other words... even at the time, educated Portland fans were probably pretty peeved.  As Bill Simmons put it, "at that point, every Blazers fan in 1984 had thrown up in their mouth at least a little".

Long story short.  We are well aware that ANthony Davis is a can't miss.  Beyond that, there's no Barkley/Jordan that I'm hearing is a "lock" to be a star.  JOrdan WAS a lock.  Bowie wasn't.

Good analysis. Only thing I take issue with is whether Anthony Davis is a "can't miss". Most would agree that he is not in the neighborhood of Hakeem as a player.   I like Davis' hustle and defensive prowess, but I just am skeptical that he is going to be some stud in the NBA. The last time I got excited about a college player with a similar skill set, Tyrus Thomas, I was hugely disappointed. 

[alajet]

Also in Bill Simmon's book... supposedly the Rockets almost traded Ralph Sampson to the Blazers for both Drexler AND the 2nd pick.  In other words, they could have had Jordan, Drexler and Hakeem.  This was according to Hakeem in his 1996 autobiography.  You gotta remember that Sampson was coming off a rookie year where at 23 years old he averaged 23 points, 12.2 rebounds, 2.6 blocks 52% shooting... so he was ridiculously good as well (7-4 228 center).  And Drexler was coming off a rookie season (picked 14th, btw) averaging 7.7 points, 2.9 rebounds, 1.9 assists and 1.3 steals.   So at the time it doesn't seem far fetched... in retrospect it sounds nuts.

Wow, no one could argue that team would have changed the history of NBA altogether.
Back on topic, we draw a comparison between Hakeem and Davis, and considering his highly acknowledged talent, that's not the craziest thing I've ever witnessed.
But still, who do we compare to MJ? I just can't see anyone with a similar skill-set, let him make the similar impact over the course of his career.

[RebusRankin]

Jordan, Drexler, Hakeem, that would have been a team to rival the dynasty Celtics.

Is this draft even as good as 2003 which has I'd say two lock HOFs (Wade, James), two players with a good HOF shot (Bosh,Anthony) and several other players with very long, good careers (Kaman, West, Diaw, Perkins, Hinrich, Ridnour, Collison)?

[LarBrd33]

Good analysis. Only thing I take issue with is whether Anthony Davis is a "can't miss". Most would agree that he is not in the neighborhood of Hakeem as a player.   I like Davis' hustle and defensive prowess, but I just am skeptical that he is going to be some stud in the NBA. The last time I got excited about a college player with a similar skill set, Tyrus Thomas, I was hugely disappointed.  

14.2 points, 10.4 rebounds, 4.7 blocks, 1.4 steals on 62% shooting and a national title as a FRESHMAN is pretty ridiculous.  Ty Thomas wasn't on that level.

[Who]

Good analysis. Only thing I take issue with is whether Anthony Davis is a "can't miss". Most would agree that he is not in the neighborhood of Hakeem as a player.   I like Davis' hustle and defensive prowess, but I just am skeptical that he is going to be some stud in the NBA. The last time I got excited about a college player with a similar skill set, Tyrus Thomas, I was hugely disappointed.  

14.2 points, 10.4 rebounds, 4.7 blocks, 1.4 steals on 62% shooting and a national title as a FRESHMAN is pretty ridiculous.  Ty Thomas wasn't on that level.

made me curious what Ty Thomas' stats were so I looked them up:

25.9mpg -- 12.3ppg, 9.1rpg, 3.1bpg, 1.3apg, 1.0spg on 61% FG%

Pretty darn impressive statistically (especially on a per minute basis, I wonder how much better those stats would have been had he been playing 32mpg like Anthony Davis had, probably close to 15/11/4)

+ Final four appearance with LSU.

[LarBrd33]

Good analysis. Only thing I take issue with is whether Anthony Davis is a "can't miss". Most would agree that he is not in the neighborhood of Hakeem as a player.   I like Davis' hustle and defensive prowess, but I just am skeptical that he is going to be some stud in the NBA. The last time I got excited about a college player with a similar skill set, Tyrus Thomas, I was hugely disappointed.  

14.2 points, 10.4 rebounds, 4.7 blocks, 1.4 steals on 62% shooting and a national title as a FRESHMAN is pretty ridiculous.  Ty Thomas wasn't on that level.

made me curious what Ty Thomas' stats were so I looked them up:

25.9mpg -- 12.3ppg, 9.1rpg, 3.1bpg, 1.3apg, 1.0spg on 61% FG%

Pretty darn impressive statistically (especially on a per minute basis, I wonder how much better those stats would have been had he been playing 32mpg like Anthony Davis had, probably close to 15/11/4)

+ Final four appearance with LSU.

Isn't the difference that Anthony Davis has like... Kevin Garnett's body and wingspan?  I can't see him failing.

[hpantazo]

Good analysis. Only thing I take issue with is whether Anthony Davis is a "can't miss". Most would agree that he is not in the neighborhood of Hakeem as a player.   I like Davis' hustle and defensive prowess, but I just am skeptical that he is going to be some stud in the NBA. The last time I got excited about a college player with a similar skill set, Tyrus Thomas, I was hugely disappointed.  

14.2 points, 10.4 rebounds, 4.7 blocks, 1.4 steals on 62% shooting and a national title as a FRESHMAN is pretty ridiculous.  Ty Thomas wasn't on that level.

made me curious what Ty Thomas' stats were so I looked them up:

25.9mpg -- 12.3ppg, 9.1rpg, 3.1bpg, 1.3apg, 1.0spg on 61% FG%

Pretty darn impressive statistically (especially on a per minute basis, I wonder how much better those stats would have been had he been playing 32mpg like Anthony Davis had, probably close to 15/11/4)

+ Final four appearance with LSU.

Isn't the difference that Anthony Davis has like... Kevin Garnett's body and wingspan?  I can't see him failing.

no way Anthony Davis falls in this draft. Now if he's a bust, who knows, but he's going #1

[guava_wrench]

Jordan, Drexler, Hakeem, that would have been a team to rival the dynasty Celtics.

Is this draft even as good as 2003 which has I'd say two lock HOFs (Wade, James), two players with a good HOF shot (Bosh,Anthony) and several other players with very long, good careers (Kaman, West, Diaw, Perkins, Hinrich, Ridnour, Collison)?

Well, Hakeem was part of the same draft and Drexler came to Houston years later.

It would have been Jordan - Sampson in Houston, which would have been an impressive duo out of the gate. Sampson was ridiculous early in his career.

Or we would have Jordan - Drexler in Portland. I suppose Drexler gets traded in that situation, probably the reason for opting for Bowie.

Edit: my bad, I missed the alleged trade post. Sampson sure had high trade value.

[vgulab]

If Davis is Hakeem than Bradley Beal is Jordan not Kidd-Gilhricht. I don't know why people are not talking about him. He is ranked top 5 top 7 on every mock but there is not a lot of talk about him. Scouts executives writers talk more about Austin Rivers. Even on celticsblog i haven't read anything about him.

I was watching couple games of Beal and he is really good. He lead the team to a deep run in the NCAA this year. He can score and he can shoot the ball. He is 6'4 but very strong body also he can play defense he can rebound. Very complete all around player he can do a lot of staff on the court reminds of Eric Gordon in body and shooting but i think he can be better than Gordon and i think he will be a STAR.

Potential wise this draft could be good as 1984 but certain players i'm not sure they can reach their potential.

Anthony Davis, Michael Kidd-Gilhcrist, Bradley Beal, Jared Sulinger are going to be really good and not going to be busts.

Great potential but also great potential for being a bust:

Harrison Barnes, Perry Jones, Andre Drummond

Lower picks who can suprise and became good players and be in our range:

John Henson, Moe Harkless, Terrence Jones, Tony Wroten

[cordialb]

As a rabid Kentucky fan, i watched both Davis and MKG every game this year.  While comparing MKG to Jordan would be a bit of a stretch, I do believe the premise that this draft could be very similiar in that the best player could end up being picked 3rd while a very good big is selected first.

However, comparing MKG to Jordan is pretty accurate in three areas. 

They are/were both high end potential guys when drafted.

Their competitive fire is OFF THE CHARTS.

MKG is absolutely the best finisher I have ever watched in college.  I know that sounds absurd, and i'm not talking about highlight reel Vince Carter finishes, but his ability to control the ball while finishing in an absolutely variety of ways at the rim.  He's so good at this, even calipari told the media that he told his players that if there is a fast break where he is an option, and they did not pass the ball to him, he would take them out of the game.

His finishing, competitive fire, and lock down defense reminds me more of Pippen than Jordan. 

He would be the perfect compliment to a defensive, ball movement oriented team with a PG who likes to get out and run.  Oh, how i wish....

[Boris Badenov]

I think this draft has four top tier prospects: Davis, MKG, T-Rob and Beal.

Then there are 5-10 guys who have at least one major flaw (Drummond, Lamb, Barnes, Lillard, Jones, Sullinger, etc.). Interesting that for many of these guys, the flaw is competitive fire rather than any basketball skill.

Then you have another 10-15 guys who should be role players or better, but have no guarantees.

I'd rate this draft as good, but not on the same level as the greatest ever (2003, 1984, 1985).